Radio Free Nepal
By Adam C Posted in Foreign Affairs — Comments (5) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The administration's embrace of Freedom and Democracy as a goal in international affairs is a good policy position in my estimation. However, as Bob Cox said on The National Debate, "Bush drops to 2-1 since State of The Union Address." He is referring to Iraq, Afghanistan and now the recent coup in Nepal.
I wanted to point out how blogs are playing a role in the efforts to fight back against the King and his totalitarian aims. Specifically, some Nepalese are blogging at Radio Free Nepal in an attempt to get information to the outside world about what is happening in their country.
This country of 20 million is strategically located in a place that can irritate both India and China if it becomes instable. The Marxist guerillas in the countryside and the authoritarian King in Kathmandu probably have both Asian juggernauts keeping a close eyes on the events as they unfold.
« So Tell Me, Mr. Immelt, Why Are You Killing American Servicemen? — Comments (30) | Forget al Qaeda, Kill the Chickens — Comments (27) »
Radio Free Nepal 5 Comments (0 topical, 5 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Is it not within the monarch's power to dismiss his first minister? Has he slaughtered thousands in so doing?
Democracy, I think it bears repeating, may be a good in itself, or it might not; but a democracy that produces Maoist collectivism is not nearly the moral equal of a monarchy that holds the line against it.
See ICG's 9 February analysis:
...I haven't followed the issue closely enough to agree or disagree with your point, Thomas..but you do have me interested. I'll at least look through the ICG stuff and see if this is any different from your example.
First, I don't think it is anywhere near accurate to characterize a constitutional monarch sacking the prime minister as a coup. This happened in Australia in 1975 when the Queen's appointed Governor General dismissed Gough Whitlam as prime minister.
I think it is a little unclear on what Nepal's king plans right now, other than ensuring the nation survives the Maoist insurgency.
The whole emphasis here, at least to me, seems more than a little misplaced. Nepal is in the throes of an extremely bloody insurgency on the order of what Peru experienced at the height of the Sendero Luminoso war. The king dismissing the prime minister in an effort to ensure the nation does not slip into a Maoist twilight doesn't move my outrage-meter very much.